JUDGES AND JUDGING.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XX, Issue 3922, 2 June 1877, Page 2

JUDGES AND JUDGING.

This was the title of a paper read by Mr P. G. King before the members of the New South Wales Agricultural Society at the late exhibition. He commenced by adverting to the dissatisfaction with the awards of judges so frequently felt and expressed at agricultural shows. In the attempt to remedy such a state of things, he had ventured to write the paper under notice, and purposed pointing out some of the defects of the present arrangements. ■ First, of the manner of appointing the judges ; secondly, of their manner of proceeding when appointed ; and, lastly, the . comparatively practical uselessness of the awards so made, in so far as the main end of these exhibitions is concerned, namely, ; the acquisition of information by . the public at large. He alluded ; to the absence of any estab- ; lished type of excellency by which I judges are to be guided ; and, until something of the sort is agreed upon, there must always be a difficulty in making j satisfactory awards. With regard to the 5 appointment of jndges, he condemns the i mode adopted by the society for the nomination of judges by the exhibitors. He recommends that a committee should be . appointed to choose judges, and that a smallfee should attach to the office, which ' would have the effect of bringing the obli- .' gation of office prominently before a man, ' and ensure his punctuality. He objects to , the judging taking place in the presence of ' the public, and though doubtless judges > might feel more at ease in judging if freed from the feeling of . being watched by critical eyes, there would \ be great practical difficulty in carrying out such a plan. He advocates that eaca \ judge should make his own independent judgment and record it upon an award paper ; these papers to be at once handed to the stewards and compared in the presence of the judges, a tie to be decided 3 by the majority of the stewards, thus adopting to some extent the balloting sys--5 tern, which is known to have good effects elsewhere. In the foregoing remarks live ' stock alone have been referred to; but B the same principle might apply to all - other exhibits. There would be no objection to the judging of live stock in the face of the public and exhibitors, if the r so-called balloting system were adopted, because in such case there could be no possible influence exercised by one judge over another ; or if there were, it would 3 be noticeable. He is in favor of making i the judges acquainted with the names of exhibitors, as most judges have a tolerably 3 clear notion where exhibits come from. L > With regard to the "points " system, he I says : — lt necessitates a much more care- > ful overhaul of each animal than, the $ ordinary practice requires. In fact, it j requires a judge to give a hundred r reasons, or as many points as make the total sum assigned, why one beast is better than another. It appeared to him that judges may easily be educated to this system. Whether, however, the "points" find favor or not, he would stronjly urge the indpendent or ballot for adoption, under which it is thought that exhibitors in general woxild accord to, or yield a more hearty approbation of, the awards than they do at the present, when adverse decisions are given. He is of opinion that if the great aim of this and kindred societies is to cultivate the quick perception of excellence, and to educate the public mind in those respects, in which it is admittedly very much in the dark, some reason should be given for the decisions of the judges. The " points " system provides a means whereby this could be easily given and as easily understood. The public would, at any rate, know something more of the " why" and " wherefore" than they do at present^ in an intelligible form. Several gentlemen took part in the discussion on the paper, most of whom coincided with the reader. Mr R. M'Dougall was of opinion that one disinterested skilful man should be appointed to judge in a section or class. If that mode were adopted, the incompetent would shrink from accepting the office, for they would have to bear the entire responsibility. He was not in favor of judging by points. A man to judge by points must be a good judge, and if he is so why hamper him with points? — Melbourne Leader.